Next A14 Upgrade

[lefthandedspanner]

I guess the A14/A12 multiplex around Ipswich needs widening as you have an increase in traffic there but the Orwell crossing is an issue and would probably need a second bridge which would be expensive.

Or, for that matter, a tunnel.

[LeedsKing]

Two reactions to Duxford idea.

What happens to the IWM? Can it stay there so that the new Cambridge airport also has an SR-71 Blackbird?

Doesn't that mean that Linton will finally have a Travel Tavern, Bangkok chickboys channel and all? It has no hotels at all, though there are some both sides of the A505.

[B6047]

Another section that could do with attention is between Rothwell and Kettering where the A14 includes A6 traffic and local between the two towns. Heading east from the two Rothwell junctions there is an uphill just after the local Rothwell traffic joins. At least this needs a local access road if not a parallel upgrade of A14. Back in 1991 the old A6 was widened to D2 on the same alignment the only section in that area that wasn't new route.

[Berk]

Another section that could do with attention is between Rothwell and Kettering where the A14 includes A6 traffic and local between the two towns. Heading east from the two Rothwell junctions there is an uphill just after the local Rothwell traffic joins. At least this needs a local access road if not a parallel upgrade of A14. Back in 1991 the old A6 was widened to D2 on the same alignment the only section in that area that wasn't new route.

Did they include the old road as part of one carriageway?? Or was it fully replaced??

[B6047]

Another section that could do with attention is between Rothwell and Kettering where the A14 includes A6 traffic and local between the two towns. Heading east from the two Rothwell junctions there is an uphill just after the local Rothwell traffic joins. At least this needs a local access road if not a parallel upgrade of A14. Back in 1991 the old A6 was widened to D2 on the same alignment the only section in that area that wasn't new route.

Did they include the old road as part of one carriageway?? Or was it fully replaced??

Yes the old A6 is one carriageway. i think it must be the eastbound side.

[roadtester]

Westbound traffic at Brampton Hut is about to be diverted via the two roundabouts of the new dumbbell junction.

From Monday morning (May 20), A14 westb ... riageways.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/c ... s-16294891

[KeithW]

Westbound traffic at Brampton Hut is about to be diverted via the two roundabouts of the new dumbbell junction.

From Monday morning (May 20), A14 westb ... riageways.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/c ... s-16294891

So this will be the first, albeit tiny, section of the new road the public gets to drive on.

I see that the large Waterbeach development has been approved which will apparently involve undefined upgrades to the A10.
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/c ... t-16278092
A cynical man would suggest that this 'upgrade' will turn out to be another roundabout.

[ColinB]

Another section that could do with attention is between Rothwell and Kettering where the A14 includes A6 traffic and local between the two towns. Heading east from the two Rothwell junctions there is an uphill just after the local Rothwell traffic joins. At least this needs a local access road if not a parallel upgrade of A14. Back in 1991 the old A6 was widened to D2 on the same alignment the only section in that area that wasn't new route.

Do we know why this section was not widened when the road to the east was done? It seems to carry as much traffic.

[KeithW]

Two reactions to Duxford idea.

What happens to the IWM? Can it stay there so that the new Cambridge airport also has an SR-71 Blackbird?

Doesn't that mean that Linton will finally have a Travel Tavern, Bangkok chickboys channel and all? It has no hotels at all, though there are some both sides of the A505.

The chances of anything happening at Duxford that is not overwhelmingly approved by its governors is zero and they would be hard to persuade or bully given that there are 22 Trustees, including the President, who is appointed by the Sovereign.

The remaining 21 members of the Board are
Desmond Bowen CB CMG
Hugh Bullock
Elizabeth Cleaver
Lieutenant-General Andrew Figgures CB CBE
Rear Admiral Amjad Hussain CB
Professor Margaret MacMillan CH CC DPhil
Tim Marlow
Suzanne Nicholas
Tamsin Todd
Peter Watkins CBE
Mark Urban
Matthew Westerman (Deputy Chair)
One vacancy
His Excellency The Hon George Brandis QC (High Commissioner for Australia)
Her Excellency Janice Charette (High Commissioner for Canada)
Her Excellency Mrs Ruchi Ghanashyam (High Commissioner for India)
His Excellency Lt General the Rt Hon Sir Jerry Mateparae (High Commissioner for New Zealand)
His Excellency Mohammad Nafees Zakaria (High Commissioner for Pakistan)
Her Excellency Ms Nomatemba Tambo (High Commissioner for South Africa)
His Excellency Manisha Gunasekera (High Commissioner for Sri Lanka)

They have statutory powers granted by various acts of parliament and in terms of influence are heavy hitters,

Lets get real here, the new Cambridge Airport will be Stansted, what will be moving is Marshall Aerospace which needs lots of covered space and a long runway neither of which are available at Duxford. There are in fact other airfields close by but they are already due to be developed. Waterbeach has already been approved and Bourn airfield just off the A428 will be next.

[KeithW]

Do we know why this section was not widened when the road to the east was done? It seems to carry as much traffic.

It boils down to money. The section as far as Kettering was the old A604, from there it was the A6 to Rothwell. This was upgraded as cheaply as possible and in fact the Kettering bypass had to be widened in 2012 as I recall. The 1990's A14 scheme was done on the cheap incorporating bits of the A45, A604 and A6 and from end to end was of extremely variable quality. In comparison with the Haughley Bends the Kettering to Rothwell section was a superhighway.
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ind ... _19926.jpg

[roadtester]

Yes - although there is a campaign group that is still pressing for improvements east of Cambridge, as I often point out, schemes such as Haughley Bends and Rougham have already brought most of this stretch up to HQDC standard.

Since then, we've also had the Catthorpe scheme, the Kettering widening and the current big Cambridge to Huntingdon. It's only with all that lot done/being delivered that Brampton to Thrapston is starting to stand out as sub-standard.

[roadtester]

Do we know why this section was not widened when the road to the east was done? It seems to carry as much traffic.

It boils down to money. The section as far as Kettering was the old A604, from there it was the A6 to Rothwell. This was upgraded as cheaply as possible and in fact the Kettering bypass had to be widened in 2012 as I recall. The 1990's A14 scheme was done on the cheap incorporating bits of the A45, A604 and A6 and from end to end was of extremely variable quality. In comparison with the Haughley Bends the Kettering to Rothwell section was a superhighway.
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ind ... _19926.jpg

Different point - isn't the Haughley Bends photo Keith has linked to in the Wiki the old Rookery Crossroads rather than Haughley Bends, or is my aging brain/memory playing tricks on me?

[Berk]

I’m not sure why you would think that?? It was uploaded by Truvelo, and marked as being located at Haughley. It’d be easy enough to find on Google.

[crb11]

Even more easily, the sign to Haughley is visible. The Rookery Crossroads are (were) something like 15 miles west of there.

[roadtester]

Even more easily, the sign to Haughley is visible. The Rookery Crossroads are (were) something like 15 miles west of there.

Ha ha! Yes, you're right! Brain scramble.

[P Bellamy]

I'd have thought another option would be/would have been Alconbury - I believe the USAF still have at least part of this but no longer as an flying base, and plan to leave completely.

I think at one point after the Americans stopped flying, there was a plan to locate an air freight facility there given the fairly decent road and rail links but that this was turned down on planning grounds. I'm guessing Marshalls would involve fewer air movements and so on so it might stand a better chance.

Alconbury has a small USAF contingent but most of it is used as a Freight transhipment depot. There may be no air freight coming in but its handy for road access from the A1(M) and A14. The ECML is close by but has restricted availability. The main runway is used to store containers and cars and the rest of the airfield is being flogged off as the Alconbury Enterprise Campus. I dont believe anything other than a helicopter could operate from there now.

https://propertylink.estatesgazette.com ... field-pe28

Over a third of Alconbury's runway has now been dug up and reduced to hardcore, no chance of the site ever seeing fixed-wing flying again.
We still keep busy on the USAF side of base though.

[KeithW]

I guess the A14/A12 multiplex around Ipswich needs widening as you have an increase in traffic there but the Orwell crossing is an issue and would probably need a second bridge which would be expensive.

Or, for that matter, a tunnel.

The Orwell crossing is an issue more because of local rather than strategic traffic. A14 traffic on either side of Ipswich is around 40k but hits 60k over the Orwell and around Ipswich. Suffolk County Council had planned to build a new Upper Orwell Crossing and received a £77,5 million funding deal from the DfT as it would relieve congestion on the A14 but cancelled the project earlier this year.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-46948086
https://committeeminutes.suffolk.gov.uk ... %20Cabinet

[Berk]

That’s news to me, hadn’t heard about that at all.

But moving on... thought I’d throw this into the mix.

I hate driving on the chaotic Milton interchange and this is why *Link now fixed*

The writer is of the opinion that the junction is “confusing”, perhaps giving drivers the benefit of the doubt, that they appear unaware of the right exit to take until the late minute (whilst not condoning their behaviour).

However, I have a different take on it. Could it be that rather than smooth traffic flow, signalisation just increases the tendency for anti-social behaviour, or frustration in others??

By that, I mean the need to wait at the lights, which is often increased when drivers further ahead are slow to pull away (frequently). More confident drivers would sometimes get wise to this, and sit in an adjoining, vacant lane, knowing they are able to pull away more quickly, and slot in at the last minute.

Would that be right?? I don’t think the issue is unique to Milton, though. And having dedicated/jet lanes wouldn’t necessarily do much to help improve things.

We do need a purge on signalisation schemes though. It reduces traffic to a severe crawl, and throttles speeds for some considerable distances beyond. At peak times you may even struggle to get through the lights in a single go. Free flow is much smoother, and more reliable.

[KeithW]

That’s news to me, hadn’t heard about that at all.

But moving on... thought I’d throw this into the mix.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/c ... 4-16277230

The writer is of the opinion that the junction is “confusing”, perhaps giving drivers the benefit of the doubt, that they appear unaware of the right exit to take until the late minute (whilst not condoning their behaviour).

However, I have a different take on it. Could it be that rather than smooth traffic flow, signalisation just increases the tendency for anti-social behaviour, or frustration in others??

By that, I mean the need to wait at the lights, which is often increased when drivers further ahead are slow to pull away (frequently). More confident drivers would sometimes get wise to this, and sit in an adjoining, vacant lane, knowing they are able to pull away more quickly, and slot in at the last minute.

Would that be right?? I don’t think the issue is unique to Milton, though. And having dedicated/jet lanes wouldn’t necessarily do much to help improve things.

We do need a purge on signalisation schemes though. It reduces traffic to a severe crawl, and throttles speeds for some considerable distances beyond. At peak times you may even struggle to get through the lights in a single go. Free flow is much smoother, and more reliable.

The link doesnt work but as for Milton its not normally confusion its usually just selfish drivers who disregard the signs for their own convenience. As you suggest they deliberately choose the wrong lane and then force their way in front of you holding everyone else up just so they can get to their destination a few seconds earlier. I dont regard this as wise - simply selfish and discourteous sending the message 'I am more important than you peasant scum - get out of my way ' I have seen drivers who do this every day - you get to recognise them after 20 years.

Is signalisation ideal - No
Is it sometimes all you can do - Yes

I would love to see Five Ways roundabout on the A11 replaced by a GSJ but in the absence of that signalisation was needed. At peak in summer unless you were on the A11 you couldnt get through it. I have waited 40 minutes to get off the A1101 and on to the A11 before finally giving up and taking to the back lanes.

[trickstat]

I suspect there are many signalized roundabouts where the mainline is delayed by 30-60 seconds but this prevents potential delays of several minutes on the other roads.